Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[jackelfrink]

So I am play testing a card. Its too strong to be $4 and not strong enough to be $5. So I need to tack something on to the $5 version to buff it up or something onto the $4 version to nerf it.

I started thinking this way. Whats actually differentiates pricing? Well the fan card creation guide breaks it down to when it gets purchased. A $2 card should always be available to be bought twice before the first shuffle. A $3 card should usualy be able to be bought twice before the first shuffle. A $4 can only ever be bought once before the first shuffle but it is guaranteed you will be able to. A $5 can wont normally be bought before the first shuffle unless you are lucky. And a $6 can never be bought before the first shuffle.

Thinking along this line of reasoning, a $4½ should be able to be purchased sometimes before the first shuffle, but not so rarely as the ⅙ chance of having a 5-2 split. 50% of the time seems like a good target to shoot for. So .....

UberCard
Action $4
Be a badass.
-----
You may only purchase this if your discard pile is empty.

To pick this up before the first shuffle, you have to be slightly lucky, but not as luck as you would need to be if the card cost $5. The further into the game you are, this becomes less of an issue.

Thing is, I cant figure out if the 'odds you cant get a $5 card before the second shuffle' are higher or lower than 'odds you cant get a $4-with-nerf card before the second shuffle.

Also, Im not sure if there any are hidden gotchas about this ability that Im just not thinking through or not being able to see.

As always, any and all feedback is helpful. Thanks in advance.

[theory]

Maybe there's a hidden turn order disadvantage with this card, because Witch will put cards into other people's discard piles.

[scott_pilgrim]

The big problem with this is that it means some players will have a $3//$4 opening while others will have a $3/$4.5.  That is, a player who draws $3 T1 and $4 T2 is in a strictly worse position than the player who draws $4 T1 and $3 T2.  There are boards with existing cards where one player's opening is strictly better than another's, most commonly in boards with no $5 cards, but those are uncommon.  Any board with UberCard on it would be such a board.

My general solution to the problem of cards costing $4.5 is to make them cost $2P (as a rough estimate, I usually think of Potion-costing cards as adding $2.5 to the cost of a card).  But a lot of times you just don't want Potion to be in the cost, so it's not a perfect solution.
It is worth considering a potion cost, which similarly but less swingily restricts access to the card.

[sudgy]

Another random, thing, it would favor engines a lot (at least certain types), which will usually have no cards left in their discard by the time they are getting good.

[LastFootnote]

I think the discard-empty clause is interesting, but it will probably cause more frustration than fun.

Perhaps you could just post the actual card so that we can suggest an appropriate nerf or buff? I don't think nerfs and buffs can be one-size-fits-all.

My general solution to the problem of cards costing $4.5 is to make them cost $2P (as a rough estimate, I usually think of Potion-costing cards as adding $2.5 to the cost of a card).

NO NO NO NO NO. A potion is not equivalent, or even roughly equivalent to 2.5 Coins. What a Potion does is limit how quickly you can pick up copies of a card. If you only have one Potion, you can only buy one potion-cost card per trip through your deck. Slapping a potion onto the cost of a card to make it cost $4.5 isn't just a copout; it's not even an effective solution.

[scott_pilgrim]

My general solution to the problem of cards costing $4.5 is to make them cost $2P (as a rough estimate, I usually think of Potion-costing cards as adding $2.5 to the cost of a card).

NO NO NO NO NO. A potion is not equivalent, or even roughly equivalent to 2.5 Coins. What a Potion does is limit how quickly you can pick up copies of a card. If you only have one Potion, you can only buy one potion-cost card per trip through your deck. Slapping a potion onto the cost of a card to make it cost $4.5 isn't just a copout; it's not even an effective solution.

Okay, I rarely ever actually end up enacting that solution, certainly not blindly.  But I very often consider it.  I should have clarified that I do think it's almost always better to find another nerf or buff.  That doesn't mean don't consider it though.  I thought we were discussing ways to limit how quickly you can pick up copies of a card?  I mean, that's basically what jackelfrink's suggestion is.  Potion is just a different way of doing it.

Edit: To clarify further, I assumed that jackelfrink's card idea was something which cannot be nerfed or buffed, except by restricting the frequency with which it is purchased.  It would be like if Coppersmith was too strong for $4 and too weak for $5; what would you add/remove to a card like that to change it?  It's fairly irreducible, and since jackelfrink didn't give us a card to work with, I was assuming his idea might be similarly irreducible.

I will edit my previous post though.  Calling it a general solution is bad.

[jackelfrink]

Another random, thing, it would favor engines a lot (at least certain types), which will usually have no cards left in their discard by the time they are getting good.

Yeah. Bad wording on my part. What I meant to type was "not empty".

Obviously if I can draw my entire deck every hand, then the option to buy would forever be on the table. And if I were to run a non draw engine I would only be able to buy one the rare situation where my last hand before the shuffle comes out exactly even.

But with the 'not' clause like I had meant to type, the buy restrictions only delay when the card enters the game but after a few shuffles it is as if the buy restriction is not there at all. So most deck types would not have to deal with it past a certain point. But a draw engine, now that you pointed it out to me, would never be able to buy this.

[jackelfrink]

Perhaps you could just post the actual card so that we can suggest an appropriate nerf or buff? I don't think nerfs and buffs can be one-size-fits-all.

Probably not. I didnt post card details cause I was more intrested in talking about just the buy restriction alone. Where would it work. Where would it not work. What are its drawbacks. What kind of cards would it theme well with. Posting the card would get a lot of other feedback other than the feedback of the one part I found intresting.

But since you asked. Its a change to the 'hero' card found here. http://boardgamestrategy.net/forum/index.php?topic=1212.0 The goal of creatig a situation where I may actualy WANT to buy curses seemed intresting. But what use is wanting to buy curses when there are no extra buys to use on buying curses. So I just made a clean break away from it being a Peddler variant and droped all ties to the original Tournament

Wandering Swordsman
Action $4½
+1 action
+1 buy
Choose one; put a curse from your hand on the bottom of your deck, or trash two curses from your hand and if you do gain a prize (from the Prize pile) or a Duchy placing it on top of your deck.

The extra card and extra money on Tournament made sense because you are trying to rush to $8 to get that first Providence. But since getting an early Providence does not synergize with the goal of Wandering Swordsman, I took them both out. The new +1 buy means you do not need to 'waste' a turn gaining a curse through buying in a non cursing attack game. The bottom decking is mostly for theme as the hero would never willingly let evil stay around, but will have minor skirmishes through the first of the film until there is one big final showdown right at the end of the film. But it is also there to make the classic TreasureMapX3 combo of drawing all three necessary parts at once a bit simpler to set up.

[jackelfrink]

I thought we were discussing ways to limit how quickly you can pick up copies of a card?

Yep. That was my original intent. And potion costs certainly would do that. But in the opposite direction than what I had wanted.

$4 and you can always get it before the first shuffle.
$5 and you might get it before the first shuffle.
$P and you will never get it before the first shuffle.

So based purely on how long it takes to get into the game, a P cost is slower than a $5. I was wanting something faster than $5 but not as fast as $4.